• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Jesus Myth

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AmbiguousGuy

Well-Known Member
sojourner said:
You're forgetting that the early Xians believed in an immanent parousia. Since people wrote things down in order to archive information, there would be no need to archive such information in a scenario in which the parousia was going to happen tomorrow. It was not until after some time had passed that they came to realize that the parousia was not happening anytime soon, and thus they began the process of archiving the stories.
Click to expand...

That seems like a somewhat legitimate argument to me, but it certainly doesn't compel.

Paul wrote lots. That seems to be an actual historical fact which makes your point irrelevant.

But he never wrote about the physical life of his Lord. It looks to me like overwhelming evidence that he'd never heard any stories about Jesus' life.
 
fallingblood

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
jelly said:
use abductive reasoning (wild guessing) and let me know if Jaywalker Soule thinks like fallingblood: that historical jesus and biblical jesus are the same and the bible doesn't portray historical jesus.
Click to expand...
:slap: Is reading really that hard for you? Because again, you missed it.
 
A

AmbiguousGuy

Well-Known Member
sojourner said:
Just a wild guess on my part: I don't get the impression that Jay gives a tinker's damn what you think of him as a participant in this debate. he's got better things to do than concern himself with your impressions.
Click to expand...

I agree. Actually, I'm not sure that he gives a tinker's damn about what anyone thinks. But it's OK. I can work with him. Don't worry.
 
A

AmbiguousGuy

Well-Known Member
fallingblood said:
As for if I believed that the scholarly consensus said Acts was good history, and Angellous came by and said no, I would most likely state that I was wrong. He is more knowledgable than me on this topic, and has definitely read more.
Click to expand...

OK. So if there is disagreement here on the forum as to the true scholarly consensus, I should accept angellous' edict on it?

Is he the absolute top dog in defining the consensus, or is there any judge here superior to him?

What if I'm off-forum? Who is the final judge of consensus in the real world?
 
A

AmbiguousGuy

Well-Known Member
JMiller said:
There in lies the problem. No one is interested in the way it looks to someone wholly unqualified to make a reputable statement about the topic at hand.
Click to expand...

That sounds a little harsh. Sure, the 'biblical scholars' around here are unqualified to discuss biblical matters, but I think you should give them a break. Think graciously. Maybe they've been out of school too long. Maybe not long enough. Maybe, well... maybe they had some difficulty with academics.

Be gracious. I'll bet Jaywalker, for example, could contribute something to this issue if we are gracious and helpful with him. Let's be encouraging!
 
fallingblood

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
AmbiguousGuy said:
OK. So if there is disagreement here on the forum as to the true scholarly consensus, I should accept angellous' edict on it?

Is he the absolute top dog in defining the consensus, or is there any judge here superior to him?

What if I'm off-forum? Who is the final judge of consensus in the real world?
Click to expand...
Yes, Angellous is the absolute top dog. He is your daddy.
 
A

AmbiguousGuy

Well-Known Member
sojourner said:
Does anyone else think that this thread needs to be drug out behind the barn and shot?
Click to expand...

I do. I think we should all just acknowledge that the historicity of Jesus has been thoroughly disproven here in this thread -- with massive evidence and irrefutable argumentation -- and move on to something more important.
 
J

jelly

Active Member
AmbiguousGuy said:
I do. I think we should all just acknowledge that the historicity of Jesus has been thoroughly disproven here in this thread -- with massive evidence and irrefutable argumentation -- and move on to something more important.
Click to expand...
I thought this thread was about historical jesus and biblical jesus not jesus.
 
A

AmbiguousGuy

Well-Known Member
fallingblood said:
Yes, Angellous is the absolute top dog. He is your daddy.
Click to expand...

Well, OK. I feel like all my stress and responsibility have suddenly fallen away. Life will be easy now.

I would just like to add that while Angellous is the final arbiter of the scholarly consensus, I myself am the final judge of all truth. So if angellous and I disagree about the scholarly consensus, then he will have to concede. I trump him as the feds trump the locals.

But I will try to be gentle, working with him behind closed doors so as to avoid any public embarrassment.

It's just the way I am.:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top